Raghavendra S R vs State Of Karnataka

K. Natarajan, J

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for granting regular bail in Crime No.38/2021, pending on the file of XXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (PCA), Bengaluru (CCH-24), registered by ACB Police, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Sections 7(a) and 7(A) of the Prohibition of Corruption Act.

Heard Sri Ravi B. Naik, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State.

The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of one Shivashankar B.N filed on 17.09.2021 alleging that he has entered into a registered agreement of sale dated 18.06.2018 with Syed Baba John in respect of the land bearing Sy. No.79 measuring 5 acres situate at Shettigere Village, Bengaluru North Taluk for valuable sale consideration of Rs.2.80 crores and he has paid sum of Rs.15.00 lakhs as advance amount to his vendor. Thereafter, there was a civil dispute arose between the complainant and others, which is pending before the Civil Court. In this background, on 23.08.2021 the complainant appears to have installed the board in the above said property regarding the civil litigation is pending before the Civil Court and it is alleged that on 28.08.2021 in the night, the opposite party by name Dinesh and others have removed the said board. In this connection, he went to the police station for lodging the complaint on 26.08.2021. At that time, the petitioner - accused No.1, who is said to be Circle Inspector of Police working in Chikkajala Police Station, demanded illegal gratification of Rs.10,00,000/- as undue advantage to provide protection to the property. Accordingly, the complainant has agreed to pay the above said bribe amount. As agreed upon, the complainant has paid illegal gratification of Rs.4,00,000/- to this petitioner on 01.09.2021 and subsequently, on the instruction of accused No.1, he has paid another Rs.4,00,000/-to accused No.2 - Vinay, who is absconding, on 06.09.2021. As the complainant is not willing to pay the remaining illegal gratification of Rs.2,00,000/-, he lodged complaint before ACB police. Accordingly, ACB Police set up a trap and they sent cash of Rs.2,00,000/- through the complainant and instructed him to give the same to accused No.1 on demand. Accordingly, on 18.09.2021 the complainant went along with shadow witness and met accused No.1 in his chamber at the Police Station. When the complainant is about to paying the said money, accused No.1 is said to have instructed him to handover the said amount to accused No.3 - Raghavendra Nayaka, who is also sitting in the chambers. Accordingly, the complainant handed over the said amount to accused No.3 and accused No.3 accepted illegal gratification of Rs.2,00,000/- from the complainant on behalf of accused No.1. Thereafter, the ACB police apprehended both accused Nos.1 and 3 and recovered tainted money and the hand wash of accused No.3, which turned pink color and it is confirmed that accused No.3 accepted the bribe amount on the instructions of accused No.1. As such, ACB police successfully completed the trap proceedings. Thereafter, ACB police arrested accused No.1 and 3 and got remanded them to the judicial custody. Therefore, both accused persons approached to the Sessions Judge for granting bail, wherein the Sessions Judge has granted bail to accused No.3 and rejected the bail petition of accused No.1. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner - accused No.1 has moved this bail petition.

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused No.1 strenuously contended that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in the case. The complainant himself registered a case in Crime No.21/2021 under Section 145 of Cr.P.C proceeding in respect of civil disputes between the Babu John and this complainant. Such being the case, the question of demanding bribe does not arise. Accused No.3, who actually caught red handed, has been granted bail. No money has been recovered from the hands of the petitioner - accused No.1. It is also alleged that after receiving the money, accused No.2 is absconding. Accused No.3 is also not at all connected with this petitioner - accused No.1. Such being the case, the question of accepting bribe money by accused No.3 on the instruction of accused No.1 does not arise. He further contended that the petitioner is in custody for more than 40 days. Investigation is almost completed except getting FSL report and filing the final report. Learned Senior Counsel contended that the complainant has already filed similar complaint against the previous Police Officer and he is in the habit of filing false complaint against the officers to harass them. He is ready to abide by any conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed for granting of bail.

Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - ACB seriously objected for granting of bail and contended that if the petitioners are released on bail, they may tamper the prosecution witnesses. The investigation is still pending and the petitioner - accused No.1 may be required for the purpose of custodial interrogation. The records and documents colleted by the Investigation Officer reveal that the petitioner - accused No.1 - Police Inspector has demanded illegal gratification of Rs.10,00,000/- and obtained Rs.8,00,000/-. Accused No.2, who received Rs.4,00,000/- bribe amount, is still absconding. The amount of Rs.4,00,000/- is yet to be recovered from the possession of accused No.2. Until filing of the charge sheet, the petitioner - accused No.1 shall not be released on bail. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the bail petition.

Upon hearing the arguments of learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Public Prosecutor and on perusal of the records, it reveals that admittedly, on the date of trap i.e., on 18.09.2021, the complainant went along with shadow witnesses with tainted cash of Rs.2,00,000/-and the same was given to accused No.3, who accepted the same. As such, the ACB police successfully completed the trap proceedings and arrested accused Nos.1 and 3. In the statement of accused No.3, it reveals that on the instructions of accused No.1, he has received the bribe amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. However, the cash was not accepted by accused No.1 and the audio record is also not produced to show that whether accused No.1 was actually demanded money from the complainant and asked accused No.3 to accept that money, which is required to be invested by Investigating Officer by getting report of audio record. The trap proceedings were already completed and accused No.3, who caught red-handed, has been granted bail by the Trial Court. But, for the reasons best known to the Investigating Officer, he has not sought any police custody of this petitioner for the purpose of recovery of Rs.4,00,000/-, alleged to have been paid by the complainant to accused No.1 on 01.09.2021. Inspite of 40 days lapse, there is no request made by the Investigating Officer. Though accused No.2 is absconding and the amount of Rs.4,00,000/- is yet to be recovered from the possession of accused No.2 and the matter is yet to be investigated by the Investing Officer, which cannot be said that the Investigating Officer is able to trace accused No.2 and recover the said amount in near future. For the purpose of arresting accused No.2 and recovering money from him, this petitioner cannot be detained in jail until filing of the charge sheet, since maximum investigation have already been completed except filing of the charge sheet and arresting accused No.2, the presence of the petitioner may not be required for the purpose of further investigation. However, the apprehension of the prosecution may be safeguarded by imposing certain conditions, while granting bail.

Apart from that, it is pertinent to note that the complainant has already filed similar complaint against earlier Police Officer and this Court has granted anticipatory bail to the Police Inspector, which is registered in Crime No.1/2021. In the said case, the charge sheet is yet to be filed by the police. The police is not able to file charge sheet within 60 days, such being the case, the custody of the petitioner would not serve any purpose. The alleged offence is either punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that if the amount was demanded and the same has been paid by the complainant on 01.09.2021. He could have brought to the notice of the Police and could have filed complaint within 7 days, but the same has been filed after 17 days and there is delay in lodging the complaint. The petitioner - Police Inspector is fleeing away from justice does not arise as the document is already seized and he is deemed to be under suspension. Such being the case, tampering the prosecution documents does not arise. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and by imposing stringent conditions, if petitioner/accused No.1 is granted bail, no prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following ORDER The criminal petition is allowed.

The Special Court is directed to release the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail in Crime No.38/2021 registered by Anti Corruption Bureau, Bengaluru pending on the file of XXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (PCA), Bengaluru (CCH-24) for the offence punishable under Sections 7(a) and 7(A) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, subject to the following conditions:-

i) Petitioner shall execute personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court;

ii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly;

iii) He shall not indulge himself in similar offences strictly;

iv) He shall take the trial without causing any delay;

v) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of this court without prior permission of the trial court; and

vi) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Monday between 10.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m., for a period of three months or till filing of the charge sheet whichever is earlier.

If any of the conditions are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.